ASEBL Journal Volume 11, Number 1 | Page 48

ASEBL Journal – Volume 11 Issue 1, January 2015 like rhythm and sound. He says, “(I)t seems clear to me that such little poems, aimed at quieting babies still unable to articulate their helplessness, pain or anger, must be common all over the world, both in cultures with, and without, a written tradition” (1990: 135). The lullaby he cites was established and socially integrated into the Old Babylonia period of c. 1950-1530 BCE (1990: 140), and contains similar patterns of rhythm (with alliteration and consonance primary among them) that can be seen in any other modern lullaby. The text is as follows (with the English translation after): sehrum wãSib bit ekletim lú tattasâm tãtamar núr èamèim ammin tabakki ammin tuggag ullikia ammin lã tabki ili bitim tedki kusarikkum iggeltêm mannum idkianni mannum ugallitanni sehrum idkika sehrum ugallitka kima Sãtu karãnim kima mãr sãbitim limqutaãàum èittum Little one, who dwelt in the house of darkness— well, you are outside now, have seen the light of the sun. Why are you crying, why are you yelling? Why didn't you cry in there? You have roused the god of the house, the kusarikkum has woken up: “Who roused me? Who startled me?” The little one has roused you, the little one has startled you! “As onto drinkers of wine, as onto tipplers, may sleep fall on him!” (1990: 140) What should be clear, despite a lack of knowledge of the Babylonian language and particular pronunciation,xxi is the constant alliteration and consonance, the particular rhythms that these effects cause. One can compare them to such random examples as ‘Rock a Bye Baby’ in English, where each lullaby builds through repetition of rhythmic consonant sounds; English utilizing B, T and L sounds, not to mention the qualities of assonance. The Babylonian lullaby here (and Farber admits on 140 that the English translation was made to reflect content, not sound) uses T, M and G sounds to create its particular rhythms. Farber says of the Babylonian text, “The form of the poem emphasizes simplicity and is thus particularly suited for memorization. Taking all this together, I consider the text to be not only a typical, but also an especially impressive example of purposeful folk poetry” (1990: 142). The question here – since what is being examined is a style of poetry which is not attempting to be artistically ornate – is why the overall similarity of sound and rhythm functions in the various lullabies unless there is an innate appreciation in the infants (and thereby has always been if a 4000 year spread is to be believed) for exactly the same kinds of rhythms and metric patterns? Dissanayake says of universal trends in mother-infant engagement and bonding, “The utterances also appear to be organized primarily into what can be transcribed as lines (or phrases), judged either by number of words, or by timed length, generally three to four seconds” (1999: 380). She builds her theory of musicality on Turner’s and Pop- 48